Meeting 12: March 27, 2026

Opener: 5 minutes

• One word that describes faculty engagement with your SI program on your campus.

Panelists:

• Erik Wasinger, Ph.D.

  • Professor of Chemistry, California State University, Chico

  • SI Associate, Faculty Champion, International Center for Supplemental Instruction

• Nataliya Turchyn, Ph.D.

  • Professor/Faculty in BIological Sciences Department, Wayne State University

---

What makes an SI partnership feel meaningful and supportive rather than intrusive?

An SI partnership feels most meaningful when it is clearly student-centered, collaborative, and low-burden for faculty. From Dr. Nataliya Turchyn’s perspective, this includes the SI leader’s ability to provide targeted support on difficult course concepts, especially in large lecture settings (150–350+ students), where individualized instructor support is limited. While extended office hours help, they cannot fully meet student demand. SI leaders bridge this gap by designing activities that promote deep understanding rather than memorization, benefiting students across courses.

Dr. Erik Wasinger reinforces this perspective by emphasizing that SI works best when it is framed as a complement to instruction—not a critique of teaching. Clear role definitions (faculty as content experts, SI leaders as facilitators) and strong communication prevent the partnership from feeling intrusive. He also highlights that faculty are more receptive when SI requires minimal time investment and helps reduce workload rather than adding to it.

• Conclusion

  • SI is most effective when positioned as student-centered support that complements instruction

  • Clear roles and low faculty burden prevent the partnership from feeling intrusive

  • Large-enrollment courses particularly benefit from SI’s targeted support model

What information or experiences increase faculty buy-in for integrating SI?

Buy-in is strongest when faculty see clear, relevant evidence of impact paired with low-effort implementation.

From Dr. Turchyn’s perspective, compelling evidence includes:

• Higher exam and assignment performance among SI attendees

• Increased student confidence and participation in class

Dr. Erik Wasinger emphasizes the power of data-driven transformation, citing his own experience reducing DFW rates from 44% to approximately 18–22% over two semesters after implementing SI and active learning. He notes that as a scientist, data is the first factor in evaluating effectiveness, and addressing concerns like self-selection bias strengthens credibility.

Additional impactful data points discussed include:

• DFW rate comparisons (pre/post SI and across departments)

• GPA differences between SI attendees and non-attendees

• Retention and course completion trends

• Conclusion

  • Data—especially DFW reduction—is the most persuasive factor for faculty buy-in

  • Addressing skepticism with research (e.g., self-selection bias) builds trust

  • Framing SI as high-impact and low-effort increases adoption across faculty types

How can SI collaborate with faculty while respecting academic autonomy?

Effective SI collaboration balances support with independence.

From Dr. Turchyn’s perspective, collaboration includes:

• Providing targeted support on difficult topics

• Reinforcing conceptual understanding through structured activities

• Sharing insights from attendance and performance data

Dr. Erik Wasinger stresses that strong communication and clear boundaries are essential. Faculty must see SI coordinators and leaders as allies rather than administrative representatives. He contrasts this with less effective tutoring models where lack of communication creates disconnects.

Best practices include:

• Flexible communication methods (email, brief check-ins, optional meetings)

• Multiple touchpoints throughout the semester

• SI leaders helping manage communication to reduce faculty burden

• Maintaining faculty control over course content and pedagogy

• Conclusion

  • Collaboration is most effective when faculty autonomy is preserved

  • Clear communication and role definition prevent conflict

  • Positioning SI as an ally builds stronger, more sustainable partnerships

What communication approaches from SI feel most effective?

From Dr. Turchyn’s perspective, one of the most effective strategies is asking faculty to identify high-performing former students to serve as SI leaders. This ensures SI leaders are well-prepared while increasing faculty investment and trust.

She also values sharing department-level data, including:

• Lower DFW rates in SI-supported courses

• Evidence that SI participants gain confidence and collaborate more effectively

Dr. Erik Wasinger and the Zoom discussion highlight additional effective approaches:

• Using multiple communication touchpoints (pre-semester, mid-semester, end-of-semester)

• Emphasizing that SI requires minimal faculty time investment

• Communicating across levels (faculty, department chairs, deans)

• Framing SI as student-centered support, not an evaluation of teaching

• Incorporating relationship-building practices (thank-you notes, invitations to events and trainings)

• Conclusion

  • Faculty engagement improves with consistent, multi-touch communication

  • Data sharing and leader selection involvement increase buy-in

  • Clear, supportive messaging reduces resistance and builds trust

What has been the best part about working with SI leaders?

From Dr. Turchyn’s perspective, the most rewarding aspect is working with former students who become SI leaders. Watching their growth and seeing them guide and inspire others reflects their dedication and creates a meaningful sense of continuity in the classroom.

Dr. Erik Wasinger echoes this, noting that one of the most fulfilling aspects of SI is seeing leaders realize that teaching deepens their own understanding. He values their development of a service-oriented mindset and their willingness to “pay it forward” to future students.

• Conclusion

  • Faculty value the mentorship and growth of SI leaders

  • Former students serving as leaders strengthen classroom community

  • SI creates meaningful developmental opportunities beyond academic outcomes

Additional insights that strengthen SI partnerships

• Faculty teaching large-enrollment courses benefit significantly from SI support

• Involving faculty in leader recruitment increases ownership and trust

• Dr. Erik Wasinger emphasizes that different faculty require different approaches:

  • Newer faculty are often more open to innovation

  • Veteran faculty respond better to data-driven, experimental framing

• Consistent communication across faculty and administration helps shift campus culture

• Small gestures (e.g., thank-you notes, invitations to SI events) build long-term relationships

• In mandated SI contexts, framing SI as reducing workload and supporting students helps mitigate resistance

• Conclusion

  • Tailored engagement strategies improve faculty adoption across experience levels

  • Relationship-building and communication are key to long-term success

  • Positioning SI as supportive rather than evaluative reduces resistance

Bottom line

A strong SI partnership is built on three pillars:

1. Targeted, student-centered support that enhances learning without duplicating instruction

2. Clear evidence of impact, especially through performance and retention data

3. Respect for faculty time and autonomy, supported by consistent, low-pressure communication

As reflected in the perspectives of both Dr. Turchyn and Dr. Erik Wasinger, when these elements align, SI becomes not an intrusion, but an essential, high-impact extension of the learning environment.

Updates & Closer: 5-8 minutes

• ICSI Updates:

  • Peer Leader Webinar Series

    • Free opportunity for professional development for SI Leaders and other peer educators, and their supervisors!

      • Sign up to attend: https://tr.ee/Op31yDZfqb 

  • Spring 2026 Community Catch-Ups: https://tr.ee/NLz6y3YTLc 

    • Free opportunity for SI supervisors, directors, and coordinators to share resources and have discussion about specific topics each month

      • April 14, 2026 - Data, Assessment, & Reporting

  • 14th ICSI Conference: https://info.umkc.edu/si/2026-conference-information/

    • Regular registration ends May 3, 2026

    • Pre-conference Workshops:

      • HELP training

      • Accreditation Workshop

      • SIL Summit

      • Weathering the Storm: Strategic Leadership for Learning Centers in Times of Fiscal Crisis

• Closer:

  • One idea from today that could strengthen faculty engagement on your campus.